‘Don't reduce our military budgets'

Sunday

Feb 17, 2013 at 4:30 AM

Mike TowerJust My Opinion

In response to the threatened sequester, I have been hearing the pro-military supporters expressing the above headline's exact words to express their profound concerns about potential reductions in military spending.They complain that we have already stripped military budgets to the bone. The number of ships in the Navy has been cut in half over the past few decades. Our men and women in uniform will have smaller pay hikes, and they will see their equipment and safety degraded.Leon Panetta was seen several times in the past few days supporting the same dogma. He states: "We have been asked to do more with less. I'm here to say we will have to do less with less, and to the detriment of American's safety." He further proclaims: "The military suppliers will have to cut thousands of jobs beginning almost immediately. ... Can you imagine what putting all of these people out of work will do to our economy?"I keep wondering in which parallel universe Mr. Panetta and the rest of the pro-military crowd lives. They know our nation must borrow nearly $700 billion a year for military spending.Remember, federal law requires that tax revenues must first pay for mandated expenses such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, interest on debt, etc., before any discretionary items are funded. Spending for these mandated-by-law items utilizes all current revenues, and, as a result, discretionary spending must be funded by borrowing.They certainly understand that we are winding down two extended wars that cost more than a trillion dollars. Surely we don't have to keep spending at the levels needed to support those wars.The pro-military folks also know the real reason for the reduction in the number of our naval ships is mostly due to technology making this form of warfare outdated and sea-going vessels less necessary. After all, today we can attack anyone, anywhere with the touch of a button. It certainly doesn't seem likely that we will ever see World War II-style naval battles again.When any family, business owner or even a country is deeply in debt with no visible way to pay off its loans, any rational and prudent financial adviser would tell it to make major reductions in spending. No true expert would ever advise it to just keep on borrowing and spending, and hope somehow the problem will solve itself later.Then, to top it all, our president spends obscene amounts of money to build up the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to levels planned to equal our military. Since this spending is likely hidden within the military budget, is it possible that part of the strong support for spending is a less transparent way of funding this incredible endeavor whose true purposes most Americans do not remotely understand?America spends more for our military than the next 14 developed nations — combined! China spends less than 20 percent of the U.S. levels, and Russia is next at around 10 percent. Common sense should make it abundantly clear that we cannot continue to spend these outrageous sums of money because we can't afford it and we don't even really need to do so.Ronald Reagan famously forced the Soviet Union to spend itself into oblivion to keep up with our military. He must be spinning in his grave watching those who followed him lead our own nation down the exact same path toward internally caused destruction.Would you be surprised if underlying all of this concern for reducing our nation's military spending are lobbyists for the armaments industry? Am I a just suspicious old man? You bet I am, and all of us should feel the same way. After all, the armaments industry stands to lose the most from any changes to America's military spending levels.This industry's leaders know any reduction in available funding will reduce their financial performance and stock prices. They cannot and will not allow it to happen without a fight. In fact, we would all be better off if every time we see a talking head on TV bemoaning military cuts, we would envision a capital letter "L" for lobbyist on his forehead.Those who want to get their greedy hands on our tax dollars and add more debt don't give a tinker's damn about our nation's long-term survival. It's all about the next quarter's sales and profits, and the next election cycle.Mr. Panetta, why have you and your fellow pro-military supporters "somehow" been persuaded to support this industry's wants instead of what's truly best for America's citizens?Mr. President, don't you think the American people deserve to know exactly why the DHS is being so dramatically expanded, and what it's supposed to protect us from?Of course, in the end, our leaders in D.C. will end up doing whatever the armaments industry tell them to do. Our leaders supporting massive industries is exactly what's gotten us so deeply in trouble. Those we elect keep on doing what hasn't worked, and they somehow convince us that it will eventually work out OK.Our leaders continue to fail us, and too many of us don't even raise an eyebrow in protest. We know what motivates our leaders. The real question is: What will it take to motivate us to do something about it?These are my opinions. What do you think?Mike Tower lives in Hendersonville. Reach him at mike41tower @gmail.com or visit capau.org.